Looking for the true Church of God

Gabriel
Baicu

In the
context of the existence of so many Christian denominations the question
about the true Church of God is entirely justified. Each and every Church
presents us with the claim that it is the true Church of God and that its
doctrine is the correct one and maintains that all other Christian doctrines
are marred by mistakes. It is understandable that the universal spiritual
experience of Christianity is mirrored by the cultural traditions of the
receivers and that these traditions leave their marks on the particular mode
of expression of faith. The forms of expression of Christianity in Brasilia,
in Siberia, in Africa or in North Europe are not the same. The way I
approach the subject is not so much influenced by this acknowledgement,
because I am not concerned primarily by the modes of manifestation,
individualised by cultural expressions, of the Christian movement. I am
mostly concerned with the doctrinal differences of diverse Christian
denominations, inscribed in their doctrines and dogmas and which
differentiates them. The acceptance of certain specificities doesn’t affect
the unity of Christianity if there is an accord on the principle of the
imperfection of human knowledge, concerning the issues of faith. There are
two kinds of unity, spiritual unity and institutional unity.

The only
thing about God, which can be fully known when living on the earth, is His
love. The human condition allows us, in a perfect way, to experiment
Christian love. The personal life sacrifice, for the benefit of other
humans, the financial generosity etc. don’t have applicability in the future
heaven, the Kingdom of God, which will be installed on the new earth, where
there will be no more poor people and where none will threaten our lives.
Here and now, on the actual earth, it is the proper environment, the field,
where we can experience agape, in its fullness and not only in words, but
mostly by concrete attitudes and facts. God is love and whoever doesn’t love
him or she doesn’t know God. (1 John 4: 8) In respect to the ontological
knowledge of the infinite dimension of the cosmic reality, which is God, by
finite entities, meaning us, the situation is different. At the moment we,
the humans, have difficulties when we try to conceive infinity; consequently
it is hard to mentally conceive God. The pretensions of the traditional
Churches to possess the ultimate true about God are absurd. They just cannot
conceive God and them are far from the knowledge of concrete things about
Him. In spite of this, there are many institutional Churches which pretend,
with arrogance, that they succeeded in fixing, in their doctrines and
dogmas, the ultimate true about God.

A
difficulty emerges when we compare among the doctrines and dogmas of the
institutional Churches these “absolute truths” and when, as a consequence of
this comparison, the conclusion is that they contradict each other,
sometimes in an irreconcilable way. From a teaching made to close the gaps
between persons and to unite them under the same vision about life,
Christianity transformed itself in a reason for divisions, separation and
conflict among them. The faith in One God, in a Trinitarian God, and its
expression in a multitude of traditional or institutional Churches, which
doctrines contradict each other, is a reality of which effects extend during
two millennia and also with important consequences for the future.

The
Christians became used with this anomaly, but if we look carefully into it,
this is a fundamental problem, when being approached may give the answers
for many of the dilemmas of Christianity. Which is the true Church of God?
Is it the Romano Catholic Church, the Orthodox one or the Greco Catholic
one, Lutheran, Calvinist, Methodist, Anglican, Baptist, Pentecostal,
Evangelist, Adventist, etc.? What is the explanation that even if there is
One God there is also so many Churches and not just one Church, the way that
would be rational. How should we see the various institutional Churches? Are
they successive evolutionary levels, a natural evolution of phenomena in its
dynamic, due to an increase in knowledge and understanding, or as parallel
branches developed from the same tree, all we the same cognitive and
spiritual value?

Was the
Reformation, bringing with it, a plus in the knowledge and understanding of
the Bible or of the Person of God? Undoubtedly, even if God don’t change,
the knowledge about Him doesn’t stagnate. This knowledge and understanding
evolves and this progress is expressed in new teachings. Nevertheless the
differences and the contradictions between the teachings of the
institutional Churches can’t be explained only by the evolution in the
knowledge and understanding of God and of the Bible cause these are
generated also by institutional interests bound to the need to perpetuate
and develop the multitude of Christian institutions, named Churches. So many
times, the evolution of Christianity is seen as an involution and many are
those who ask for a comeback to the primitive Church. Sometimes
institutional Churches name themselves in manners that even their name can
be seen as a suggestion to the apostolic period, for example: “The Apostolic
Pentecostal Church.” Consequently, the diverse corporatist Churches emerged
from the 16 to the 20 century cannot be regarded as superior levels in the
evolution of Christianity because they are born from the nostalgia of the
past. ‘Superior’ in this context means a comeback to the source, to the
beginnings. How far should we comeback to the beginnings and how genuine
this return can be? We need always to comeback to Jesus teachings because
He is the founder of Christianity. But what means evolution for
Christianity? Is it about new revelations or only about the revelation
already given through Jesus and through the New Testament? It is not the
drive towards Christian unity, the real evolution? Why is that? That is
because Jesus urged unity from the Christians. (John 17; 21) In the same
time, I will make the difference between institutional ecumenism and
spiritual ecumenism. The institutional one it looks like being problematic,
but the spiritual one is powerful and is a fact, it is the power and the
future of Christianity. What is the spiritual ecumenism? It is manly the
link between Christian faithful persons, regardless of their appurtenance to
an institutional Church or the other. It is a unity in and through the Holy
Spirit, in and through Christ, in a through God. It is a spiritual unity not
necessarily and institutional one.

Through
the Bible we are informed that there is a single Church of God.

“There
is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called to the one hope of your
calling, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is
above all and through all and in all. (Ephesians 4; 4-6)[1]

We should
note that apostle Paul referred to the times of his life, when he has spoken
about the unity of Christ’s body, namely about the true Church of God. The
unity is not a project in the future it is a present reality, it is fully
actual. The unity of the Church of God was a unity from the times of Paul
and in fact was an always present reality in the true Church of God. The
first problem is to know where must be looked for this unique Church. Is
this One Church of God one of the many Christian denominations? If the
answer is a positive one, which one of them is the true Church of God? What
are the criteria to evaluate the traditional Churches in order to know which
the true Church of God is? Is one of the criteria the conformity between a
certain doctrine and the Bible and who is to establish this concordance? The
Bible is a collection of texts which interprets one through the others but
in the context that there are so many interpretations which are the sets of
criteria suitable to insure the most exact expression of its message?

Are the
texts of the Bible only a linguistic expression, a ‘enveloping’ with words
of something much more profound and high, that they are able to express, an
expression of the spirit of Christianity? Most probably the answer is a
positive one. Which is the main or the essential message of the Bible, above
the rich diversity of its interpretations? How come that all institutional
Churches are quoting the biblical texts as an argument for authenticity but,
in the same time, all contradict each other, in respect of their doctrines?
Supposing that we compare Christian doctrines among themselves; can we
establish which the correct one is, when we compare them with the Bible?
Personally, studying the teachings of the Christian denominations I reached
the conclusion that none of the doctrines of the Christian denominations are
in a full accord with the N.T.

All
Christian doctrines reflects, in a certain degree, the truths contained by
the Bible but from the moment that they get circumscribed in a fix set of
dogmas, all truths loose some of their completeness, of their spirit. The
dynamic of the N.T. is a lively one and to enclose it within the limits of a
doctrine means to reduce its vivacity and even to suffocate it. The
doctrines are the coffin of the spirit of Christianity. I would use the
example of an object that must be cut in order to enter in a box. Under an
aspect or another all the doctrines of the Christian denominations get away
from the N.T. More than that, the divisions between the doctrines are
sometimes deliberately cultivated because only a doctrine different from
others justifies the existence of a certain Christian denomination and the
leaderships of the institutional Churches are interested in maintaining the
differences. This is only one of the motifs which explain why none of the
existing Christian traditions can receive the qualification of the true
Church of God. The problem is certainly not solved only by this
acknowledgement. It is important to investigate also the possibility that
all the Christian denominations together represent the true Church of God.
Personally, I reject this possibility because from the presentation of the
N.T. about the true Church of God one can see that its members are in a
perfect unity. In the same time, the Christian denominations are divided
between themselves; they are not in unity and their sum or totality, the
compound realized by their institutional combination, or association, lacks
the essential feature, which is unity that will allow the characterization
as the true Church of God.

Before
being crucified Jesus raised a desire to the Father that all Christians to
be one, that is to be in unity.

“<<I
ask not only on behalf of this, but also on behalf of those who will believe
in me through their word, that they all may be one. As you, Father, are in
me and I am in you, may they also be in us, so that the world may believe
that you have sent me. The glory that you have given me I have given them,
so that they may be one, as we are one, I in them and you in me, that they
may become completely one, so that the world may know that you have sent me
and have loved them even as you have loved me>>.”
(John 17; 20-23)[2]

Even
though Jesus asked for unity the Christians are not yet in unity, they are
not ‘one,’ as Jesus wanted for them. Is that prayer of Jesus without
response and in case of a positive answer how can we explain this? As a
matter of fact, none of the Jesus’ prayers, to the Father, can be without
answer and that is presented by the Bible.

“They
took the stone away. Jesus looked up and said, <<I
thank you, Father that you listen to me. I know that you always listen to
me, but I say this for the sake of the people here, so that they will
believe that you sent me>>.” (John 11; 41-42)[3]

Always,
without exceptions the Father listen to the Son and fulfils its prayers.
There is not doubt in this regard because the Father and the Son are One.

“Do
you not believe, Philip, that I am in the Father and the Father is in me?
The words that I have spoken to you, Jesus said to his disciples,
<<do not come from me. The Father, who remains in me,
does his own work>>.”
(John 14; 10)[4]

If the
father was the One who prayed in Jesus, when He asked for unity amongst
Christians it is impossible that He would not answer to His own prayer.
There are not such errors with God. In fact there is unity between
Christians, but is a spiritual unity not an institutional one. There is just
One Spiritual Church of God and many institutional Churches. The One
Spiritual Church is constituted from all Christians, regardless of the
Christian denominations which they belong, who are born again, which means
that they are spiritual regenerated. God is our Father only when He gives us
birth, in a spiritual manner that is to be born from his Holly Spirit.
Christians are born twice, ones from a biological point of view and the
second time from the Spirit, which means from God.

“Jesus
answered, <<I am telling you the truth: no one can
see the Kingdom of God without being born again>>.”(John 3; 3)[5]

“<<I
am telling you the truth>> replied Jesus.
<<No one can enter the Kingdom of God without being
born of water and the Spirit. A person is born physically of human parents,
but is born spiritually of the Spirit>>.” (John
3; 5-6)[6]

All
believers who went through the process of being born again are the true
children of God, because they are born from the Holly Spirit, and the Holy
Spirit is God. To be born of the Spirit means to be born from God, so to be
His children. All this persons have the right of calling Him father.

“To
show that you are his sons and daughters, God sent the Spirit of his Son
into our hearts, the Spirit who cries out, <<Father, my Father>>.”
(Galatians 4; 6)[7]

The true
Church of God is a spiritual entity, with no institutional organization, but
which members are also, at the present, members of the institutional
Churches but some of its members are outside any clerical institutions. The
characteristics of the One Spiritual Church are: It is initiated by God. Its
members are each and every one of them known and accepted by God. Its
structure is established by Him. Its projects and its finality are
determined by Him. This spiritual reality, which is the true Church of God,
doesn’t possess material assets, such as buildings or other material means,
doesn’t have paid clerical functionaries, and doesn’t have bank accounts.
Its existence doesn’t need any license or approval from an official
institution. The One Spiritual Church of God has its headquarters and its
leadership in heaven. The entrance in the One Spiritual Church of God, for
its members, was realized even before the beginning of the world. (Efeseni
1; 4)[8]

Jesus
never intended to transform His Church in a religious institution. Jesus
understood by Church a different thing than is usually understood today. In
fact, Jesus came to preach the Kingdom of God and not a religious
organization. Jesus saw in the Church His spiritual body, and also His own
image. The members of His Church are to be considered His brothers and His
sisters, all are destined by God to come to the same moral stature as Him.
(Efeseni 4; 13) All members of the true Church of God are becoming like
Christ, in His character and that doesn’t mean lack of personality but
spiritual regeneration. The One Spiritual Church has its origins at the
Pentecost. From it belongs all born again Christians from all institutional
Churches. In the same time, only the Christians who are born again are also
members of the true Church of God and that regardless of their appurtenance
to any traditional Churches. That means that it is not enough to be a member
of an institutional Church to gain salvation, one need to be also a member
of the true Church of God, in the same time. All members of the One
Spiritual Church are in perfect spiritual unity, through the Holy Spirit,
even if they don’t know each other. They are bound by the love of God,
existing in their beings, agape and they recognize each other when they
meet.

[1]The Holy Bible
containing the Old and New Testaments with
Apocryphal/Deuterocanonical books New Revised Standard Version
Anglicized Edition Oxford University Press

[2]The Holy Bible
containing the Old and New Testaments with
Apocryphal/Deuterocanonical books New Revised Standard Version
Anglicized Edition Oxford University Press